tv Democratic Platform Committee Meeting Day 2 Part 2 CSPAN July 13, 2016 7:07am-7:35am EDT
the proponent will speak first. >> i am kylee stevenson from indiana. i think that we need to send a strong message. arrested andman is incarcerated for having a small amount of weed on him and is not able to get gainful employment prison, ands out of is unable to support his family -- if we are not going to look at the collateral consequences for the hundreds of thousands of people who are incarcerated for small, low-level crimes in this country, many of whom -- this disproportionately affects committees of color and african-americans, if we are not going to look at the collateral consequences of their lives and their families, that we should not provide the same privilege to white-collar criminals who
steal millions of dollars from regular working people. >> anyone else wishing to be heard? this is out of the five-minute proponents. >> i am jane mr. scher: i am from oregon -- i am jane. i am from oregon. i wisht an attorney, but i -- i wish they had the concept of economic malpractice. i think it could be applied to corporations who loot people's pensions and those who devastate communities by -- >> anyone who is an opponent, we will go to the opposition argument. >> >> my name is mark and i am from philadelphia. wait to seea cannot you all and a couple of weeks. all of us together.
delegate and i am standing in opposition to this. make no mistake. onare completely together the spirit of prosecuting white-collar principles to the fullest extent. through twoone amendments which increase the resources, increase the penalties and look for better laws. unanimously, and in unity, and together. we're strong statements. they are not just words. they are words that need to apply to everyone. there is no white-collar criminal individual who should get off in a crime because of the collateral issue, period.
it doesn't happen to the extent that you all think it does. oing]o seeobody here wants to anyone get off of a crime to some excuse -- because of some excuse. out ofea is borne frustration with this system. if you think of the idea, it is an idea that is actually going to have collateral consequences that none of us want to see. supposing there is a hospital executive in a community hospital who ripped off the system and commits a crime, he needs to go to jail, no problem. now the prosecutor has to look at the institution. if iis he can look and say
prosecute that hospital, they lose their license, jobs are lost and medical care in the community can not be served. plus they can waive those issues and decide whether or not the hospital also gets prosecuted, you have bad collateral consequences, things you don't want to have. you don't want to take that discretion away from the prosecutor and it is strongly the idea of it goes too far. that is why we're asking you not to vote for this but to stand changeshe very strong to stand behind the platform of strong white-collar -- the rules are now, they were read this morning it is five
minutes -- did you want to speak on the same side? if you want to speak on the same side, go ahead. >> why would you want to assume i would be on the other side? >> no, no. [laughter] >> usual suspect. [laughter] pennsylvania.m my colleague and i have been voting on opposite sides of most of this but the same side of this one. i am a criminal defense lawyer. that says there is the doctrine that should apply that takes collateral consequences into account when negotiating plea agreements period. it says in anything. tell you, prosecutors take a lot of things into consideration when determining what to do.
away from prosecutors their ability to consider anything when determining what plea to offer, the entire system will come to a halt and the system of justice will be a disaster. >> i think we can call the question. cards.do this by everyone in favor racer hand. it represents the majority. everyone voting against the majority? let's go on to the next one. amendment number 144. the proposed amendment was on
page eight. proposal to admit the words "an historic." >> even as we agree there is a lot more work to do, we democrats recognize that dodd frank was a major achievement. these reforms were not just monumental, they were historic. the most significant reforms we have put in place since the great depression. recognizes that. i urge its approval.
>> the amendment has been made and spoken to. ?o we have 15 seconders if no one wishes to be heard in opposition, i will call the question. all those in favor of the amendment, please raise your cards. anyone wishing to be noted as having voted against, there are roughly 20. let me just say -- we will have coffee, soda, bottled water, and cookies. kathleen kennedy and the campaigns and i want to thank all of the platform committee members for their hard work.
>> thank you mr. chair, amendment 159 sponsored by maxine waters. the proposed amendment is on page eight, line 24 after the words stopped dead in its tracks every republican effort to weaken it, insert the following. we will ensure that our regulators have the resources and independence that they need to fully enforce the law and hold both individuals and corporations accountable. >> the opponent has one minute. >> i am maxine waters. i am the ranking member of the financial services committee. the republican spend a great deal of time trying to
weaken our regulatory agencies. that is why we have dodd frank reform. if you can recall what happened went08 when this country into recession, almost depression, regulatory agencies work not funded, they were supposed to be a lot safety and soundness but they did nothing. they tried to weaken these agencies by underfunding them. sec is our cop on the block. they are concerned about derivatives and banker transparency. you know what they are doing to the cfpb. that is the consumer financial protection bureau that we created. dealing with the fraud that has been committed by some of the
automobile dealers. looking at all the fraud going secondaryr post financial education institutions. they cannot do what they are doing to weaken this oversight that we need. >> some of their efforts give us a new senator in the commonwealth of massachusetts. do we have 15 supporters? this is how it works. the proponents go first. five minutes for the proponents and then we will hear it in opposition. >> ladies and gentlemen, this is all about whether or not we are going to have the oversight agency that will protect the
citizens. this is all about whether or not they will have the resources to do this job. the way that you weaken them is by denying them the appropriations and that is what the republicans do day in and day out. they have the majority and they undercut their ability to do what we would have them do. i do want to call your attention not only to the sec and the cftc, the commodities trading commission. i want to direct you to the financial protection bureau. that is the greatest thing that came out of the dodd frank. we were supposed to have oversight for consumers in law, ped off there drop agenda.
reform, the dodd frank we had nobody looking out for average consumers. fact that weke the have one director. they want to create a commission so they can have the majority and kill what he is doing. what they would like to have done is have him come before the appropriation's committee where republicans have the majority so they can deny them the funds. >> anyone else in support? i am embarrassed to admit that our republican congressman andy barr serves in the financial services committee and i can testify to the fact that he has been dedicating his career to weakening dodd frank and even to limit it out right. congresswoman waters is absolutely right. this is something that needs to be safeguarded against because a
lot of the efforts are not direct. a lot of them are in direct efforts to do everything they can to weaken these regulations. i would encourage everybody on the sanders and clinton platforms to support this piece. >> additional support? >> i am merry from the state of wisconsin. one brilliant thing that was done for the consumer product safety commission, the cfp be -- pb, is that the budget was linked to the federal reserve in congress. they have been trying to kill it by putting it under the budget. it is important for folks to which has on the cftc brought new authority to put over-the-counter derivatives on the transparent market so we can see what is going on with crude oil speculation.
in order for these agencies -- you may want glass-steagall, you may want to break up the banks, so do i am a but we need to defend some of these important gains we have made. x anyone else wishing to be heard? we have 40 seconds. that ast want to say democrats if we do not give the tools to enforce regulations, it discredits the regulation. if dodd frank doesn't work because we do not fund the regulation, it will be blamed for the next financial collapse. we need to make sure the have the tools and i want to thank congressman waters for putting this forward. >> for those wishing to be heard in opposition, please step forward. [indistinct yelling]
>> all right, thank you. [inaudible] >> all right, thank you. do.ave work to . mr. chair, my name is igor emery and i rise to very specific opposition in this particular amendment. like for them to consider removing objectionable words. i would like to see the words "of the other party" removed from this amendment. this is the democratic platform i don't want to spend time advertising for other parties. if we could strike that name i would be happy. >> anyone else wishing to be heard in opposition?
no one else wishing to be heard. we will do it by white cards. all in favor of the amendment, racer cards. it passes overwhelmingly. number 20 sponsored by dennis on page eight, line 20 it -- line 28. we embellished that there is room within our party for a broadery of views on a financial transactions taxed. tokets will quickly adapt any sort of financial transactions tax which will provide stability in the marketplace and fund necessary programs which will ultimately help all businesses. >> the proponent has one minute. time for our party to be firm with policies related to the financial services industry.
>> as democrats, there are certain things that we stand for. any kind of financial transaction tax is something we would be agreeing on without so much room for wiggling. when the voters look at this , they say to us that we are waffling. we to be a strong democratic party that stands for real things, clearly for what it believes. the kind of language is not conducive to a strong campaign.
we can tell people that they need to vote for the democratic party, that we are strong. thank you. >> this is not my favorite language. improvementt is an over some of that line was that exists. there are thousands of people across the united states, including a large group of nurses who are campaigning for a robin hood tax as a way to bring financial stability and a great way to raise revenue for all sorts of programs. thatamendment acknowledges the market will quickly adjust to the financial transaction tax. it will not collapse the global economy. europe is already slapping one
on and it will be a mechanism for funding future programs without giving any specifics. >> any other speakers? we will now go to those opposed to the amendment and after that we will take a vote. i am a hillary delegate standing in opposition to this. allbasic principle that we agree with is embodied in the platform and the two sentences before. i think it is important for all of us to take a look at that. it says that our goal must be to take a financial system and an economy that works for all americans, not just a handful of billionaires. we support a financial transaction tax on wall street to curb high frequency trading which has threatened financial markets. there is diversity of opinion on
a broader tax, when everyone supports a financial transaction tax and tie for 20 trading. unity language. this was an effort to litigate what was carefully worked out by sanders and clinton drafters. this is an effort at unity. one thing that you need to think when you try to figure out how broad the tax should be is do you want that tax on middle-class 401k's do you want that tax on union pension funds. you should think about that and that is why there is a diversity present -- position. money that isn of behind the unity amendment that i asked you to support.
this amendment and support with a unity folks did in drafting this platform. the imf estimates that a financial transaction tax of 0.1% which is a 1/5 of the parties proposal in the campaign would reduce market values by 7.6%. if you translate that to a reduction of wealth, it means a family that would amass $250,000 of assets for their future would see the value of those assets decline by $20,000. that is why how broadly we make this tax needs to be worked out. i urge you to stand behind what the brilliant drafters did and defeat the amendment. >> anyone else wishing to be heard, we will do this on white
cards. everyone who is in favor of the amendment to raise your card. everyone who is against the amendment, race your card. have won.nst we will take a very short break. hang on. there is a reason. to cochair and i have asked have a meeting with both campaign staffs. it should not take long. a break to meet with those campaign staffs, i would like to do a quick survey. how many people in the room would like to complete the double -- their deliberations tonight or the early morning hours? we will go have a meeting and we will be back very shortly. don't wonder away.
a couple of pieces of information i would like to share with all of you. we have gone through approximately 150 amendments so far. [applause] some of those have been withdrawn. many of them have been debated. we have approximately 80 left a process. the sections we have remaining are about affordable education, ensuring the health and safety of all americans, combating and thechange, remainder of bring americans together to remove barriers to create letters of opportunity. that was the original section five that we refer to. we have largely gone through that. there were some stickingnt